God as Master and the Institutional Order
ί Clement
God as Master and the Institutional Order Clement places arguments such as the ones described above in the framework of another symbol which dominates his epistle. Alongside the condensed symbol of Christ, he places the symbol of God the Master (δεσπότης) of the universe. These two symbols are not distinct in this writing. One of the chief benefits which the individual in Christ enjoys is knowledge. We have already noted passages in which Clement describes the knowledge members possess by being incorporated into Christ (36:2; 40:1; 59:2), Included in this knowledge is the revelation of God, the sovereign ruler of the universe. When Clement urges in 40:1 that the Corinthians should do all things in the order which the Master commanded since they have looked "into the depths of the divine knowledge"
(εις τά βάθη της θείας γνώσεως), he is probably referring generally to the entire preceding discussion.242 But, more particularly, this passage also echoes what Clement already has stated in 36:2. If the community has any insight into God's nature this is because of enlightenment through Christ Again, 59:2 speaks of the revelation that Christ has brought as one which makes known the glory of the Creator's name.
With this knowledge comes a recognition of the ordering power of God "the Master" in the cosmos. In 59:3 Clement states that God is the source of all creation and that it is Christ who has opened the believers' eyes to recognize God the Creator's majesty. Clement's invocation of God as Master (δεσπότης) characterizes God as an all-controlling being. Used some twenty-four times in the course of the epistle,243 alongside the symbol of Christ, God the Master is central to the world-view Clement presents. It is from the concept of God as δεσπότης that Clement's themes of order, harmony, and humble-mindedness follow, as well as his descriptions of the Corinthian upstarts as arrogant, proud, and seditious. This symbol is used to justify the institutional order by portraying the structures of leadership in the Corinthian community as an instance of the Master's ordering power.
In the previous section we stated that Clement's argument in chapters 42 and 44 contains legitimating applications of the idea that all structures in the universe are ordered by God. The theme of the order of the cosmos has been investigated by several scholars who have debated whether Clement's description of order in chapter 20 is Stoic.244 But the way in which this passage and others like it (33:2-3; 61:1-2) relate to Clement's overall purpose has been inadequately assessed. Clement wants to show that central to the knowledge of the divine will revealed through Christ is that all things should be done according to the will of God. The portrayal of God as a δεσπότης is intended to communicate the all-powerful nature of God as an ordainer of order and harmony.
The institutional order of the Corinthian community is placed by Clement in a symbolic universe of a divinely appointed order. Jaeger shows how Clement weaves together rhetorical, philosophical, and Christian themes to present God as a sovereign master of order and harmony. But this weaving together does not represent, as Jaeger argues, the transposition of Christianity into a philosophical key which is then transmitted as "a new concept of Christian paideia."245 The fact that Clement borrowed themes from his environment does not necessarily imply that he had a definite idea that Christian culture was analogous to Greek,
The Social Setting of the Ministry nor that he was consciously attempting to transform his religion into hellenistic ideals.246 It is more likely that Clement found in contemporary philosophical and rhetorical expressions a meaningful way to draw out the implications of the beliefs of the community which he wanted to emphasize in order to legitimate the authority of its deposed leaders.
Jaeger points out that Greek paideia, by deriving the norms of social behaviour from the divine norms of the universe, connected cosmology and social ethics with each other.247 Similarly, when Clement explicated the community's beliefs about God the Master of the universe, he was very probably attempting to show how the group's world-view carried with it a certain ethos.
In 19:2 Clement exhorts the Corinthians to meditate upon the Creator and his gracious character. This is seen in the order he has established in the universe
(20:lf.). The ideals of "harmony" (ομόνοια) and "peace" (ειρήνη), themes drawn from the wider philosophical milieu, which the Roman presents to the Corinthians are illustrated for them by the order of the cosmos (20:1,3,9,10).
This cosmic order is an example for Clement's readers to be in peace and harmony, especially since they have received mercy from the Father and Creator of the cosmos through Christ (v. 11). It is this same structuring God who has established the order of the Corinthian church.
Subjection, Harmony, and Humility — The Community Ethos and the Institutional Order The prayer for the governing authorities which Clement presents in 60:4-61:2 may be interpreted as a cleverly devised expression of the theme which he has developed throughout the preceding epistle: all authority is from God and since it is divinely established members should be subject (ύποτάσσεσθαι) to those to whom it is given (61:1). This is not, as Eggenberger argues,248 an apologetic message for the governing authorities, assuring them that the Christians pray for them. It is better understood as a reiteration of the theme of the sovereign ordering power of God. The message is probably more for those whom Clement regards as questioning divinely appointed authorities than it is an appeal for imperial benevolence.
Subjection to Leaders and Subjection to God The theme of subjection is developed in a more pointed way earlier in the epistle where Clement, weaving together Paul's body motif in 1 Cor. 12:12-31 with other non-biblical Greek themes,249 exhorts the Corinthians to obey God, who has established different ranks in the Corinthian church, in the same way as an army obeys its leader (37:1-3). It is God who distributes each spiritual gift
(χάρισμα —38:1) and this implies a certain order in which members subject (ύποτάσσεσθαι) themselves to one another according to their particular gifts.
As we noted earlier in this chapter, in the process of borrowing Paul's motif of the body in 1 Cor. 12 Clement emphasizes God's sovereign dispensation of various gifts to support his argument that there is a certain order to be preserved in thë community.
The presentation of themes such as this in the course of the epistle means
ί Clement
that Clement's exhortations concerning the order of the Corinthian community in chapters 40-44 are placed within the context of beliefs concerning the more general cosmic order. In 42:2-4 Clement emphasizes that the structures of leadership in the Corinthian church originated with the ordering power of God.
And when he cites in v. 5 the prophecy that God would do this, he is further highlighting the belief that behind the institutional order in Corinth, as behind all order, there is an all-powerful and all-knowing God who has established it.
Clement's theory that the apostles established the church's leadership structures belongs to a larger symbolic universe which envelopes and penetrates the institutional order with subjectively meaningful beliefs. By concentrating on themes which are developed from the group's beliefs in a Creator God, Clement puts forward an ethos which is both consistent with the Corinthian's worldview and demands an end to the schism in the community. The belief, for example, in myriad heavenly angels subject (ύποτάσσεσθαι) to God's will implies (cf. ούν, v. 7) that the Corinthians are also to exist in concord (34:5-7).
Concord is a favourite theme which Clement employs to describe the characteristic ethos that flows from obedient submission to the Master God. Clement repeatedly uses the term ομόνοια to express the ideal of obedience to God
(21:1; 34:7, cf. v. 5; 49:5, cf. v. 1; 50:5; 63:2; cf. 60:4) and the orderly community life which flows forth from it (30:3).
The ομόνοια which Clement describes in chapter 20 is presented as an instance of God's graciousness (19:3), given especially to the redeemed Corinthian community (19:2; 20:11).250 In other passages, following the Greek classical tradition before him, Clement also uses the term to describe a state of ideal citizenship worthy of God (21:1; cf.
54:4). In a similar way in 2:8, although not using the term ομόνοια, Clement associates good citizenship under God's rule with obedience to his commandments and ordinances (τά προστάγματα και τά δικαιώματα —cf. 3:4) —a virtue evinced according to the context of these passages by harmonious community life.
A second theme which in one passage is associated with ομόνοια (30:3) is humility or humble-mindedness. The root ταπεινόoccurs twenty-eight times in the epistle as a favourite expression used to describe varying states of humility. Among the occurrences of this root, the most significant are passages in which the verb ταπεινοφρονεϊν (2:1; 13:1,3; 16:1,17; 30:3; 48:6; 62:2; cf. 38:2) and the noun ταπεινοφροσύνη (21:8; 30:8; 44:3; 56:1; 58:2) and related forms appear: in these passages the term describes a state of humble submission to the will of God or a virtue of meekness which contributes to the common good of community life. Concord and humble-mindedness flow directly from submission to the will of God. The themes of concord and humility arise ultimately from belief in a Master God who has established all cosmic and social order.
Strife, Sedition, and Arrogance: The Ethos of the Disobedient If all order comes from God, then the community's institutional structures arc also divinely established and not to subject oneself to them is therefore a transgression of what is willed by God. Clement not only presents the virtues which are consonant with belief in an ordering God, he also puts forward the vices which follow from disobedience to his will. His characterization of the Corin-
The Social Setting of the Ministry thian dispute as strife or sedition (στάαις — 1:1; 2:6; 3:2; 14:2; 46:9; 51:1; 54:2;
57:1; 63:1) is another instance of his use of rhetorical themes borrowed from the Hellenistic tradition.251 This theme follows well from Clement's presentation of Christianity as a politeia (2:8; 54:4).
But Clement's development of these concepts is not merely an exercise in rhetoric. The portrayal of the schismatics as seditious fits in with the belief that all order is established by God, Sedition, according to Clement, is disobedience to God (3:2-4; 14:1-2; 51:1-3; 57:1-2; 63:1-2; cf. 2.6). Further, Clement's exhortations to be obedient to God (9:1; 14:1; 58:1; 59:1; 63:1) are not evidence, as Harnack argues, that Clement's letter represents "enthüllte alttestamentliche
Religion," i.e, a "Gesetzreligion."252 This interpretation of the references to obedience and disobedience in 1 Clement obscures Clement's social concern in his attempt to portray an ethos which follows from the group's symbolic universe. Harnack overlooks the role these ideas are made to play in the justification of the community's institutional structures and instead treats the Roman epistle as though it were a treatise devoted to topics of salvation. Of course,
Clement does possess a certain soteriology, but his interest in putting it forth is connected with the Corinthian situation; it is not simply an exercise in dogmatics. When he writes in 44:4 that those who have ejected the presbyters from the place established for them (v. 5) are guilty of no small sin, behind this contention stands a belief in a sacred, inviolable, and divinely-willed order. He connects dis-obedience and obedience to God with respect for properly established structures of leadership, thus giving them a holy status.
Arrogance is a theme which Clement associates with strife and sedition. His portrayal of arrogance as an undesirable quality (30:1; 35:5; 49:5; 57:2; cf. 30:8), a pointed judgment of the leaders of the Corinthian rebellion, stands in opposition to his ideals of humility and meekness. In 35:5, pride and arrogance, vainglory (κενοδοξία), and inhospitality are associated with a character opposed to God's will. Just as those who follow God's will demonstrate certain ethical ideals, so the consequences of disobedience is a corresponding negative ethos (see the catalogue of vices in 30:1; also, 35:5-11; 57:2-7).
The Institutional Order as the Will of God and the Call to Repentance Strife, sedition, arrogance — these are themes connected in Clement's mind with rejection of God's will. Since it is God who has established the institutional order of the Corinthian church, the upstart Corinthians have opposed His purposes by upsetting it. Clement places the Corinthian church's leadership structures in an inviolable sacred order which demands respect. To oppose those institutions which have been divinely established is not only to engage, according to Clement, in division, it is to call the group's symbolic universe or worldview into question. The theme of the will of God appears repeatedly in 1 Clement (Inscrip.; 20:4; 21:4; 32:4; 34:5; 36:6; 40:3; 42:2; 49:6; 56:1,2; 61:1) and by means of it Clement places the Corinthian dispute in a sacred context. In 40:3,
Clement argues that God has established "by his supreme will" the order of leadership in the Corinthian church. The Corinthian church's organization is presented as part of a universal order that originates with God's will. Clement